Manager Details

Menu

“We want to learn from centuries of investment history”

Rules-based investing can be very transparent. Belying the ‘black box’ misconception, Robeco’s Jan Sytze Mosselaar discusses how quant-based strategies can be more transparent than conventional fundamental investing and outlines his views on the future development of quant-based methodologies.

Speed read:

• Quant models can be transparent

• Human oversight remains key

• History matters to quants

Quants are often seen as solely focused on databases and rules-based models, and therefore detached from the market’s daily ups and downs. Would you agree?

“Not at all. Robeco’s quant managers closely follow market developments and their influence on our clients’ money. Even though we invest in a rules-based manner, it’s important that we can explain our performance in a logical and sensible way. This is possible because our factor-based stock selection models are transparent – not complicated black-box processes.“

“Within Robeco, there’s a clear divide between researchers and portfolio managers (PMs). Researchers tend to be more detached from the daily ups and downs. I think that’s a good thing – they should focus on developing and enhancing models that work in the long-term. But we PMs need to be able to explain what’s happening in our client portfolios, something that my 10-year role as a multi-asset allocator comes in handy for. An advantage of rules-based investing is that you don’t act on noise, you keep calm in volatile periods and don’t fall for one of the many behavioral pitfalls.”

Follow this Manager on

Browse this manager's…

What’s new

In our second podcast, David Blitz discusses the latest trends and issues in factor investing, in which investors chase factors such as low-volatility, value or momentum to get the best picks for their funds. And he says intriguingly: “We do not offer black box solutions, but rather ‘glass box’ solutions”.

Does low-risk investing work with A-shares? This study finds that the low-risk anomaly is even bigger in China than in the US. It finds that whereas the relation between risk and return is too flat in the US, which is already at odds with the CAPM, the relation is outright inverted in China.

To be considered relevant, a factor must first and foremost be backed by ample empirical evidence. In the absence of such evidence, academic research on multi-asset factor premiums could suffer from ‘p-hacking’ (or ‘data mining’). Recent research by Robeco uses new and previously unused deep historical financial data. The results allay any p-hacking concerns.

Over the past five years, FTSE Russell’s annual smart beta survey of asset owners has become a must-read. It provides useful insights on how factor investing is perceived by global institutional investors. To dig deeper into the results of the latest survey, we talked to Marlies van Boven, Managing Director of Research & Analytics at FTSE Russell.

In the first podcast, Daniel Wild explains why embracing SI is “a good sort of selfish”, as it enables the investor to enjoy superior risk-adjusted returns while also helping the planet on a range of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues at the same time.